The second campaign of the Romagna had opened for Cesare as easily as had the first.
So far his conquest had been achieved by little more than a processional display of his
armed legions. Like another Joshua, he reduced cities by the mere blare of his trumpets.
At last, however, he was to receive a check. Where grown men had fled cravenly at his
approach, it remained for a child to resist him at Fænza, as a woman had resisted him at
Forli.

His progress north from Pesaro was of necessity slow. He paused, as we have seen, at Rimini, and he
paused again, and for a rather longer spell, at Forli, so that it was not until the second week of
November that Astorre Manfredi-the boy of sixteen who was to hold Fænza-caught in the distance the
flash of arms and the banners with the bull device borne by the host which the Duke of Valentinois led
against him.

At first it had been Astorre’s intent to follow the examples set him by Malatesta and Sforza, and he
had already gone so far as to remove his valuables to Ravenna, whither he, too, meant to seek refuge.
But he was in better case than any of the tyrants so far deposed inasmuch as his family,
which had ruled Fænza for two hundred years, had not provoked the hatred of its subjects,
and these were now ready and willing to stand loyally by their young lord. But loyalty
alone can do little, unless backed by the might of arms, against such a force as Cesare was
prepared to hurl upon Fænza. This Astorre realized, and for his own and his subjects’ sake
was preparing to depart, when, to his undoing, support reached him from an unexpected
quarter.

Bologna-whose ruler, Giovanni Bentivogli, was Astorre’s grandfather-in common with Florence and
Urbino, grew daily more and more alarmed at the continual tramp of armed multitudes about her
frontiers, and at the steady growth in numbers and in capacity of this splendid army which followed
Casare-an army captained by such enemies of the Bentivogli as the Baglioni, the Orsini, and the exiled
Malvezzi.

Bentivogli had good grounds for his anxiety, not knowing how long he might depend upon the
protection of France, and well aware that, once that protection was removed, there would be no barrier
between Bologna and Cesare’s manifest intentions concerning her.

Next to Cesare’s utter annihilation, to check his progress was the desire dearest just then to the heart
of Bentivogli, and with this end in view he dispatched Count Guido Torella to Fænza, in mid-October,
with an offer to assist Astorre with men and money.

Astorre, who had succeeded Galeotto Manfredi in the tyranny of Fænza at the age of three, had been
and still continued under the tutelage of the Council which really governed his territories. To this
Council came Count Torella with Bentivogli’s offer, adding the proposal that young Astorre should be
sent to Venice for his personal safety. But to this the Council replied that it would be useless, if that
course were adopted, to attempt resistance, as the people could only be urged to it by their affection
for their young lord, and that, if he were removed from their midst, they would insist upon
surrender.

News of these negotiations reached Rome, and on October 24 Alexander sent Bentivogli
his commands to refrain, under pain of excommunication, from interfering in the affairs
of Fænza. Bentivogli made a feeble attempt to mask his disobedience. The troops with
which he intended to assist his grandson were sent ostensibly to Castel Bolognese, but with
instructions to desert thence and make for Fænza. This they did, and thus was Astorre
strengthened by a thousand men, whilst the work of preparing his city for resistance went briskly
forward.

Meanwhile, ahead of Cesare Borgia, swept Vitellozzo Vitelli with his horse into Astorre’s dominions.
He descended upon the valley of the Lamone, and commenced hostilities by the capture and
occupation of Brisghella on November 7. The other lesser strongholds and townships offered no
resistance to Cesare’s arms. Indeed they were induced into ready rebellion against their lord
by Dionigio di Naldo-the sometime defender of Imola, who had now taken service with
Cesare.

On November 10 Cesare himself halted his host beneath the walls of Fænza and called upon the town
to surrender. Being denied, he encamped his army for the siege. He chose the eastern side of the town,
between the rivers Lamone and Marzano, and, that his artillery might have free play, he caused several
houses to be demolished.

In Fænza itself, meanwhile, the easy conquest of the valley had not produced a good effect. Moreover,
the defenders had cause to fear treachery within their gates, for a paper had been picked up out of the
moat containing an offer of terms of surrender. It had been shot into the castle attached to an
arbalest-bolt, and was intended for the castellan Castagnini. This Castagnini was arrested, thrown into
prison, and his possessions confiscated, whilst the Council placed the citadel in the hands of
four of its own members together with Gianevangelista Manfredi-Astorre’s half-brother,
and a bastard of Galeotto’s. These set about defending it against Cesare, who had now
opened fire. The duke caused the guns to be trained upon a certain bastion through which
he judged that a good assault might be delivered and an entrance gained. Night and day
was the bombardment of that bastion kept up, yet without producing visible effect until
the morning of the 20th, when suddenly one of its towers collapsed thunderously into the
moat.

Instantly, and without orders, the soldiers, all eager to be among the first to enter, flung
themselves forward in utter and fierce disorder to storm the breach. Cesare, at breakfast-as he
himself wrote to the Duke of Urbino-sprang up at the great noise, and, surmising what was
taking place, dashed out to restrain his men. But the task was no easy one, for, gathering
excitement and the frenzy of combat as they ran, they had already gained the edge of the
ditch, and thither Cesare was forced to follow them, using voice and hands to beat back
again.

At last he succeeded in regaining control of them, and in compelling them to make an orderly retreat,
and curb their impatience until the time for storming should have come, which was not yet. In the
affair Cesare had a narrow escape from a stone-shot fired from the castle, whilst one of his
officers-Onorio Savelli-was killed by a cannon-ball from the duke’s own guns, whose men, unaware of
what was taking place, were continuing the bombardment.

Hitherto the army had been forced to endure foul weather-rain, fogs, and wind; but there was worse
come. Snow began to fall on the morning of the 22nd. It grew to a storm, and the blizzard continued
all that day, which was a Sunday, all night, and all the following day, and lashed the men pitilessly and
blindingly. The army, already reduced by shortness of victuals, was now in a miserable plight in its
unsheltered camp, and the defenders of Fænza, as if realizing this, made a sortie on the 23rd, from
which a fierce fight ensued, with severe loss to both sides. On the 25th the snow began again,
whereupon the hitherto unconquerable Cesare, defeated at last by the elements and seeing that his
men could not possibly continue to endure the situation, was compelled to strike camp on the
26th and go into winter quarters, no doubt with immense chagrin at leaving so much work
unaccomplished.

So he converted the siege into a blockade, closing all roads that lead to Fænza, with a view to shutting
out supplies from the town; and he distributed troops throughout the villages of the territory with
orders constantly to harass the garrison and allow it no rest.

He also sent an envoy with an offer of terms of surrender, but the Council rejected it with the proud
answer that its members “had agreed, in general assembly, to defend the dominions of Manfredi to the
death.”

Thereupon Cesare withdrew to Forli with 150 lances and 2,500 foot, and here he affords a proof of his
considerateness. The town had already endured several occupations and the severities of being the seat
of war during the siege of the citadel. Cesare was determined that it should feel the present occupation
as little as possible; so he issued an order to the inhabitants upon whom his soldiers were billeted to
supply the men only with bed, light, and fire. What more they required must be paid for, and, to avoid
disputes as to prices of victuals and other necessaries, he ordered the Council to draw up a
tariff, and issued an edict forbidding his soldiers, under pain of death, from touching any
property of the townsfolk. Lest they should doubt his earnestness, he hanged two of his
soldiers on December 7-a Piedmontese and a Gascon-and on the 13th a third, all from the
windows of his own palace, and all with a label hanging from their feet proclaiming that
they had been hanged for taking goods of others in spite of the ban of the Lord Duke,
etc.

He remained in Forli until the 23rd, when he departed to Cesena, which was really his capital in
Roomagna, and in the huge citadel of which there was ample accommodation for the troops that
accompanied him. In Forli he left, as his lieutenants, the Bishop of Trani and Don Michele da
Corella-the “Michieli” of Capello’s Relation and the “Michelotto” of so many Borgia fables. That this
officer ruled the soldiers left with him in Forli in accordance with the stern example set him by his
master we know from the chronicles of Bernardi.

In Cesena the duke occupied the splendid palace of Malatesta Novello, which had been magnificently
equipped for him, and there, on Christmas Eve, he entertained the Council of the town
and other important citizens to a banquet worthy of the repuation for lavishness which
he enjoyed. He was very different in this from his father, whose table habits were of the
most sparing-to which, no doubt, his Holiness owed the wonderful, almost youthful vigour
which he still enjoyed in this his seventieth year. It was notorious that ambassadors cared
little for invitations to the Pope’s table, where the meal never consisted of more than one
dish.

On Christmas Day the duke attended Mass at the Church of San Giovanni Evangelista with great
pomp, arrayed in the ducal chlamys and followed by his gentlemen. With these young patricians Cesare
made merry during the days that followed. The time was spent in games and joustings, in all of which
the duke showed himself freely, making display of his physical perfections, fully aware, no doubt, of
what a short cut these afforded him to the hearts of the people, ever ready to worship physical beauty,
prowess, and address.

Yet business was not altogether neglected, for on January 4 he went to Porto Cesenatico, and there
published an edict against all who had practised with the fuorusciti from his States, forbidding the
offence under pain of death and forfeiture of possessions.

He remained in winter quarters until the following April, from which, however, it is not to be
concluded that Fænza was allowed to be at peace for that spell. The orders which he had left behind
him, that the town was constantly to be harassed, were by no means neglected. On the night of
January 21, by arrangement with some of the inhabitants of the beleaguered city, the foot surrounding
Fænza attempted to surprise the garrison by a secret escalade. They were, however, discovered betimes
in the attempt and repulsed, some who had the mischance-as it happened-to gain the battlements
before the alarm was raised being taken and hanged. The duke’s troops, however, consoled themselves
by capturing Russi and Solarolo, the last two strongholds in the valley that had held for
Astorre.

Meanwhile, Cesare and his merry young patricians spent the time as agreeably as might be in Cesena
during that carnival. The author of the Diario Cesenate is moved by the duke’s pastimes to criticize
him severely as indulging in amusements unbecoming the dignity of his station. He is particularly
shocked to know that the duke should have gone forth in disguise with a few companions to repair to
carnival festivities in the surrounding villages and there to wrestle with the rustics. It is not difficult to
imagine the discomfiture suffered by many a village Hercules at the hands of this lithe young
man, who could behead a bull at a single stroke of a spadoon and break a horseshoe in
his fingers. The diary in question, you will have gathered, is that of a pedant, prim and
easily scandalized. So much being obvious, it is noteworthy that Cesare’s conduct should
have afforded him no subject for graver strictures than these, Cesare being such a man as
has been represented, and the time being that of carnival when licence was allowed full
play.

The Pope accounted that the check endured by Cesare before Fænza was due not so much to the foul
weather by which his army had been beset as to the assistance which Giovanni Bentivogli had rendered
his grandson Astorre, and bitter were the complaints of it which he addressed to the King of France.
Alarmed by this, and fearing that he might have compromised himself and jeopardized the
French protection by his action in the matter, Bentivogli made haste to recall his troops,
and did in fact withdraw them from Fænza early in December, shortly after Cesare had
gone into winter quarters. Nevertheless, the Pope’s complaints continued, Alexander in his
secret, crafty heart no doubt rejoicing that Bentivogli should have afforded him so sound
a grievance. As Louis XII desired, for several reasons, to stand well with Rome, he sent
an embassy to Bentivogli to express his regret and censure of the latter’s intervention in
the affairs of Fænza. He informed Bentivogli that the Pope was demanding the return of
Bologna to the States of the Church, and, without expressing himself clearly as to his own
view of the matter, he advised Bentivogli to refrain from alliances with the enemies of
the Holy See and to secure Bologna to himself by some sound arrangement. This showed
Bentivogli in what danger he stood, and his uneasiness was increased by the arrival at Modena
of Yves d’Allègre, sent by the King of France with a condotta of 500 horse for purposes
which were not avowed but which Bentivogli sorely feared might prove to be hostile to
himself.

At the beginning of February Cesare moved his quarters from Cesena to Imola, and thence he sent his
envoys to demand winter quarters for his troops in Castel Bolognese. This flung Bentivogli into
positive terror, as he interpreted the request as a threat of invasion. Castel Bolognese was too
valuable a stronghold to be so lightly placed in the duke’s hands. Thence Bentivogli might, in
case of need, hold the duke in check, the fortress commanding, as it did, the road from
Imola to Fænza. He had the good sense, however, to compromise the matter by returning
Cesare an offer of accommodation for his men with victuals, artillery, etc., but without the
concession of Castel Bolognese. With this Cesare was forced to be content, there being no
reasonable grounds upon which he could decline so generous an offer. It was a cunning
concession on Bentivogli’s part, for, without strengthening the duke’s position, it yet gave the
latter what he ostensibly required, and left no cause for grievance and no grounds upon
which to molest Bologna. So much was this the case that on February 26 the Pope wrote to
Bentivogli expressing his thanks at the assistance which he had thus given Cesare in the Fænza
emprise.

It was during this sojourn of Cesare’s at Imola that the abduction took place of Dorotea
Caracciolo, the young wife of Gianbattista Caracciolo, a captain of foot in the Venetian
service. The lady, who was attached to the Duchess of Urbino, had been residing at the
latter’s Court, and in the previous December Caracciolo had begged leave of the Council of
Ten that he might himself go to Urbino for the purpose of escorting her to Venice. The
Council, however, had replied that he should send for her, and this the captain had done.
Near Cervia, on the confines of the Venetian territory, towards evening of February 14, the
lady’s escort was set upon by ten well-armed men, and rudely handled by them, some being
wounded and one at least killed, whilst the lady and a woman who was with her were carried
off.

The Podestá of Cervia reported to the Venetian Senate that the abductors were Spaniards of the army
of the Duke of Valentinois, and it was feared in Venice-according to Sanuto-that the deed might be the
work of Cesare.

The matter contained in that Relation of Capello’s to the Senate must by now have been widespread,
and of a man who could perpetrate the wickednesses therein divulged anything could be
believed. Indeed, it seems to have followed that, where any act of wickedness was brought
to light, at once men looked to see if Cesare might not be responsible, nor looked close
enough to make quite sure. To no other cause can it be assigned that, in the stir which the
Senate made, the name of Cesare was at once suggested as that of the abductor, and this so
broadly that letters poured in upon him on all sides begging him to right this cruel wrong.
So much do you see assumed, upon no more evidence than was contained in that letter
from the Podestá of Cervia, which went no further than to say that the abductors were
“Spaniards of the Duke of Valentinois’ army.” The envoy Manenti was dispatched at once to
Cesare by the Senate, and he went persuaded, it is clear, that Cesare Borgia was the guilty
person. He enlisted the support of Monsieur de Trans (the French ambassador then on
his way to Rome) and that of Yves d’Allègre, and he took them with him to the Duke at
Imola.

There, acting upon his strong suspicions, Manenti appears to have taken a high tone, representing to
the duke that he had done an unworthy thing, and imploring him to restore the lady to her husband.
Cesare’s patience under the insolent assumption in justification of which Manenti had not a single
grain of evidence to advance, is-guilty or innocent-a rare instance of self-control. He condescended
to take oath that he had not done this thing which they imputed to him. He admitted
that he had heard of the outrage, and he expressed the belief that it was the work of one
Diego Ramires-a captain of foot in his service. This Ramires, he explained, had been in
the employ of the Duke of Urbino, and in Urbino had made the acquaintance and fallen
enamoured of the lady; and he added that the fellow had lately disappeared, but that already
he had set on foot a search for him, and that, once taken, he would make an example of
him.

In conclusion he begged that the Republic should not believe this thing against him, assuring the
envoy that he had not found the ladies of the Romagna so difficult that he should be driven to employ
such rude and violent measures.

The French ambassador certainly appears to have attached implicit faith to Cesare’s statement, and he
privately informed Manenti that Ramires was believed to be at Medola, and that the Republic might
rest assured that, if he were taken, exemplary justice would be done.

All this you will find recorded in Sanuto. After that his diary entertains us with rumours which were
reaching Venice, now that the deed was the duke’s, now that the lady was with Ramires. Later the two
rumours are consolidated into one, in a report of the Podestá of Cervia to the effect that “the
lady is in the Castle of Forli with Ramires, and that he took her there by order of the
duke.” The Podestá says that a man whom he sent to gather news had this story from one
Benfaremo. But he omits to say who and what is this Benfaremo, and what the source of his
information.

Matters remaining thus, and the affair appearing in danger of being forgotten, Caracciolo goes before
the Senate on March 16 and implores permission to deal with it himself. This permission is denied him,
the Doge conceiving that the matter will best be dealt with by the Senate, and Caracciolo is ordered
back to his post at Gradisca. Thence he writes to the Senate on March 30 that he is certain his wife is
in the citadel of Forli.

After this Sanuto does not mention the matter again until December of 1503-nearly three
years later-when we gather that, under pressure of constant letters from the husband, the
Venetian ambassador at the Vatican makes so vigorous a stir that the lady is at last delivered
up, and goes for the time being into a convent. But we are not told where or how she is
found, nor where the convent in which she seeks shelter. That is Sanuto’s first important
omission.

And now an odd light is thrown suddenly upon the whole affair, and it begins to look as if the lady
had been no unwilling victim of an abduction, but, rather, a party to an elopement. She displays a
positive reluctance to return to her husband; she is afraid to do so-“in fear for her very life”-and she
implores the Senate to obtain from Caracciolo some security for her, or else to grant her permission to
withdraw permanently to a convent.

The Senate summons the husband, and represents the case to him. He assures the Senate that he has
forgiven his wife, believing her to be innocent. This, however, does not suffice to allay her
uneasiness-or her reluctance-for on January 4, 1504, Sanuto tells us that the Senate has received a
letter of thanks from her in which she relates her misfortunes, and in which again she begs that her
husband be compelled to pledge security to treat her well (“darli buona vita”) or else that
she should be allowed to return to her mother. Of the nature of the misfortunes which
he tells us she related in her letter, Sanuto says nothing. That is his second important
omission.

The last mention of the subject in Sanuto relates to her restoration to her husband. He tells us that
Caracciolo received her with great joy; but he is silent on the score of the lady’s emotions on that
occasion.

There you have all that is known of Dorotea Caracciolo’s abduction, which later writers-including
Bembo in his Historiae-have positively assigned to Cesare Borgia, drawing upon their imagination to
fill up the lacunae in the story so as to support their point of view.

Those lacunae, however, are invested with a certain eloquence which it is well not to disregard.
Admitting that the construing of silence into evidence is a dangerous course, all fraught with pitfalls,
yet it seems permissible to pose the following questions:

If the revelation of the circumstances under which she was found, the revelations contained
in her letters to the Senate, and the revelations which one imagines must have followed
her return to her husband, confirm past rumours and convict Cesare of the outrage, how
does it happen that Sanuto-who has never failed to record anything that could tell against
Cesare-should be silent on the matter? And how does it happen that so many pens that
busied themselves greedily with scandal that touched the Borgias should be similarly silent?
Is it unreasonable to infer that those revelations did not incriminate him-that they gave
the lie to all the rumours that had been current? If that is not the inference, then what
is?

It is further noteworthy that on January 16-after Dorotea’s letter to the Senate giving the
details of her misfortunes, which details Sanuto has suppressed-Diego Ramires, the real and
known abductor, is still the object of a hunt set afoot by some Venetians. Would that be
the case had her revelations shown Ramires to be no more than the duke’s instrument?
Possibly; but not probably. In such a case he would not have been worth the trouble of
pursuing.

Reasonably may it be objected: How, if Cesare was not guilty, does it happen that he did not carry out
his threat of doing exemplary justice upon Ramires when taken-since Ramires obviously lay in his
power for years after the event? The answer to that you will find in the lady’s reluctance to return to
Caracciolo, and the tale it tells. It is not in the least illogical to assume that, when Cesare threatened
that vengeance upon Ramires for the outrage which it was alleged had been committed, he fully
intended to execute it; but that, upon taking Ramires, and upon discovering that here was no such
outrage as had been represented, but just the elopement of a couple of lovers, he found
there was nothing for him to avenge. Was it for Cesare Borgia to set up as a protector and
avenger of cuckolds? Rather would it be in keeping with the feelings of his age and race
to befriend the fugitive pair who had planted the antlers upon the brow of the Venetian
captain.

Lastly, Cesare’s attitude towards women may be worth considering, that we may judge whether such
an act as was imputed to him is consistent with it. Women play no part whatever in his history. Not
once shall you find a woman’s influence swaying him; not once shall you see him permitting dalliance
to retard his advancement or jeopardize his chances. With him, as with egotists of his type, governed
by cold will and cold intellect, the sentimental side of the relation of the sexes has no place. With him
one woman was as another woman; as he craved women, so he took women, but with an
almost contemptuous undiscrimination. For all his needs concerning them the lupanaria
sufficed.

Is this mere speculation, think you? Is there no evidence to support it, do you say? Consider, pray, in
all its bearings the treatise on pudendagra dedicated to a man of Cesare Borgia’s rank by the physician
Torella, written to meet his needs, and see what inference you draw from that. Surely such an inference
as will invest with the ring of truth-expressing as it does his intimate nature, and confirming
further what has here been said-that answer of his to the Venetian envoy, “that he had not
found the ladies of Romagna so difficult that he should be driven to such rude and violent
measures.”